• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.
  • We seem to be having technical difficulties with new user accounts. If you are trying to register please check your Spam or Junk folder for your confirmation email. If you still haven't received a confirmation email, please reach out to our support inbox: support.forum@diabetes.org.uk

Amadeus.

Chris Hobson

Chris Hobson

Well-Known Member
Relationship to Diabetes
Type 2
How I got my first exposure to this movie is now lost in the mists of time. I never saw it at the cinema and I think that a VHS video might have been among my wife's possessions when we first set up house together in 1993. It is rather long at about two and a half hours and is a little strange as it starts as a lively comedy but ends as a rather dark tragedy. I quite liked it and watched it more than once before it became something residing in the back of my mind.

A year or two ago we got a new Sky box which uses a satellite dish but is also connected to the WiFi router and allows us to watch You Tube videos on the big telly. Because I have an interest in classical music, the YT algorithm started to suggest videos about Amadeus, what makes this movie great, the making of Amadeus, how historically accurate is Amadeus, along with various clips from the movie. Watching these has rekindled my interest in the film and I thought that I would like to watch it again. We have quite a big collection of DVDs and for some reason I assumed that Amadeus would be among them and was disappointed when I couldn't find it. I realised that it was probably on a VHS, either in the loft or possibly not having been sold at our last car boot sale. Of course Amazon saved the day once again and I ordered a DVD.

This DVD edition is the Director's Cut which is almost three hours long so you can understand why the original version had to be cut down a bit. In this version there is a scene where Elizabeth Berridge gets her togs off which, while being a treat for the boys, might originally have been cut in order to get a less adult oriented rating at the cinema.

Amadeus is the film version of a play of the same name by Peter Shaffer. It is a completely fictional story but based on real life characters Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Antonio Salieri. The story is narrated by Salieri as an old man via the well proven medium of flashbacks. Salieri wanted nothing more than to be a great composer and gradually becomes insanely jealous of Mozart's God given talent, especially as he is such a totally obnoxious little brat. Much intrigue follows and so many of the scenes are really memorable which is presumably why so many clips appear on You Tube. What makes this movie great? The acting is brilliant, as are the costumes, the scenery, the soundtrack and everything else about it. It won't be everyone's cup of tea obviously but, if your attention span can take it, it is well worth a look.

This edition came with a bonus disc that included the making of the movie. It was filmed in Prague during the Cold War. The totally paranoid communist government caused plenty of problems but the scenery, both indoors and outdoors was more or less stuck in the eighteenth century to start with so that saved a lot of work and helped to make the scenes look really authentic.
 
Last edited:
My brother is named after this film (my dad named him)!
But I've never seen it. Must give it a watch!
 
Chris Hobson said:
How I got my first exposure to this movie is now lost in the mists of time. I never saw it at the cinema and I think that a VHS video might have been among my wife's possessions when we first set up house together in 1993. It is rather long at about two and a half hours and is a little strange as it starts as a lively comedy but ends as a rather dark tragedy. I quite liked it and watched it more than once before it became something residing in the back of my mind.

A year or two ago we got a new Sky box which uses a satellite dish but is also connected to the WiFi router and allows us to watch You Tube videos on the big telly. Because I have an interest in classical music, the YT algorithm started to suggest videos about Amadeus, what makes this movie great, the making of Amadeus, how historically accurate is Amadeus, along with various clips from the movie. Watching these has rekindled my interest in the film and I thought that I would like to watch it again. We have quite a big collection of DVDs and for some reason I assumed that Amadeus would be among them and was disappointed when I couldn't find it. I realised that it was probably on a VHS, either in the loft or possibly not having been sold at our last car boot sale. Of course Amazon saved the day once again and I ordered a DVD.

This DVD edition is the Director's Cut which is almost three hours long so you can understand why the original version had to be cut down a bit. In this version there is a scene where Elizabeth Berridge gets her togs off which, while being a treat for the boys, might originally have been cut in order to get a less adult oriented rating at the cinema.

Amadeus is the film version of a play of the same name by Peter Shaffer. It is a completely fictional story but based on real life characters Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Antonio Salieri. The story is narrated by Salieri as an old man via the well proven medium of flashbacks. Salieri wanted nothing more than to be a great composer and gradually becomes insanely jealous of Mozart's God given talent, especially as he is such a totally obnoxious little brat. Much intrigue follows and so many of the scenes are really memorable which is presumably why so many clips appear on You Tube. What makes this movie great? The acting is brilliant, as are the costumes, the scenery, the soundtrack and everything else about it. It won't be everyone's cup of tea obviously but, if your attention span can take it, it is well worth a look.

This edition came with a bonus disc that included the making of the movie. It was filmed in Prague during the Cold War. The totally paranoid communist government caused plenty of problems but the scenery, both indoors and outdoors was more or less stuck in the eighteenth century to start with so that saved a lot of work and helped to make the scenes look really authentic.
Click to expand...
Come to think of it. I seem to remember a lot references to the movie in Seth MacFarlane‘s Family guy?
 
I watched Amadeus several years ago when it was first released. Hubby and I are both Mozart fans. We were lucky enough to see his house in Salzburg, which is quite a tourist draw. Also lots about him in the museum of music in Vienna.
 
silver minion said:
I watched Amadeus several years ago when it was first released. Hubby and I are both Mozart fans. We were lucky enough to see his house in Salzburg, which is quite a tourist draw. Also lots about him in the museum of music in Vienna.
Click to expand...
I passed through there once years back driving. On the way to Innsbruck for some reason on travels with my wife. Mozart is said to be the godfather of rock? I can kinda see it with the progressive stuff, maybe? I can almost hear his influence on the operettas of Gilbert and Sullivan, too?
 
"Mozart is said to be the godfather of rock?"

JS Bach surely, his stuff pops up all over the place.

"I can kinda see it with the progressive stuff, maybe?"

The Trans Siberian Orchestra did a cracking rock version of The Overture To The Marriage Of Figaro.
 
There is a young artist called Conan Grey. His most recent album, Found Heaven, has a lot of eighties electro pop style tracks and a couple of tracks that sound very like the ELO. it is pretty good.
 
Last edited:
I was watching a appraisal of Bob Dylan and an American musician opined that when God was handing out talent, he did not just tap Dylan on the shoulder, he kicked him in the ass.

Mozart I reckon had had the same treatment.
 
Docb said:
I was watching a appraisal of Bob Dylan and an American musician opined that when God was handing out talent, he did not just tap Dylan on the shoulder, he kicked him in the ass.

Mozart I reckon had had the same treatment.
Click to expand...
Do you have your mod hat on or off on this one. Because Gilbert and Sullivan‘s politics satire of the time had its moments too. Dylan was an early “punk.” When he adopted electric guitar his vocal technique changed from folk to the punk sneer of rebellion. In my view. (& ear.)
 
Quite clearly off - you can take that generally as read when discussing opinions on cultural matters.

Dylan's talent for me was vested in the poetry of his lyrics. His delivery moved about for sure, but you can take the lyrics of almost any song, whatever the style it was sung in and get pleasure from their complex simplicity. The group of musicians that backed him were not bad either.

I like a bit of G&S and can remember, as a schoolboy, seeing the D'Oyly Carte production of The Mikado at Stratford. My own opinion is that they were more tapped on the shoulder. Yes, the operas have a good foundation in the score but they rely on the guality of the production to get full value. It is sad that much of their satire is lost on a modern audience as are some of the bawdier lyrics. Nanki-poo announcing he was looking for Yum-Yum would have raised a right old snigger in the pit back in the day.

I watched last night, and not for the first time, the Analogues stage production of Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band. The core group is supplemented by a string section, wind section, keyboards and percussion and present the whole album exactly as on the record. The only clue to it not being the record is the voices - they use their own rather than try and imitate the Beatles. An amazing tour de force.
 
Docb said:
Quite clearly off - you can take that generally as read when discussing opinions on cultural matters.

Dylan's talent for me was vested in the poetry of his lyrics. His delivery moved about for sure, but you can take the lyrics of almost any song, whatever the style it was sung in and get pleasure from their complex simplicity. The group of musicians that backed him were not bad either.

I like a bit of G&S and can remember, as a schoolboy, seeing the D'Oyly Carte production of The Mikado at Stratford. My own opinion is that they were more tapped on the shoulder. Yes, the operas have a good foundation in the score but they rely on the guality of the production to get full value. It is sad that much of their satire is lost on a modern audience as are some of the bawdier lyrics. Nanki-poo announcing he was looking for Yum-Yum would have raised a right old snigger in the pit back in the day.

I watched last night, and not for the first time, the Analogues stage production of Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band. The core group is supplemented by a string section, wind section, keyboards and percussion and present the whole album exactly as on the record. The only clue to it not being the record is the voices - they use their own rather than try and imitate the Beatles. An amazing tour de force.
Click to expand...
My father was well into G&S & would take me to see D'Oyly Carte productions as a kid, when they toured? I actually scattered my dad’s ashes in Penzance (pirates of.) as I couldn’t afford let alone work out what the law was on scattering in Venice? (The gondoliers.)
 
Chris Hobson said:
"Mozart is said to be the godfather of rock?"

JS Bach surely, his stuff pops up all over the place.

"I can kinda see it with the progressive stuff, maybe?"

The Trans Siberian Orchestra did a cracking rock version of The Overture To The Marriage Of Figaro.
Click to expand...
Tony Palmer regarded Lennon and McCartney as "the best songwriters since Schubert".
 
Satan’s little helper said:
I passed through there once years back driving. On the way to Innsbruck for some reason on travels with my wife. Mozart is said to be the godfather of rock? I can kinda see it with the progressive stuff, maybe? I can almost hear his influence on the operettas of Gilbert and Sullivan, too?
Click to expand...
... and Gilbert O'Sullivan too?

1739634602427.png
 
Satan’s little helper said:
Do you have your mod hat on or off on this one. Because Gilbert and Sullivan‘s politics satire of the time had its moments too. Dylan was an early “punk.” When he adopted electric guitar his vocal technique changed from folk to the punk sneer of rebellion. In my view. (& ear.)
Click to expand...
I think that Dylan was perfectly capable of sneering right from the start of his career - such as in 'Masters of War' from his second album. He was able to use his voice as an instrument, changing it to suit his purposes. For example, his 'country' voice was completely different to any of the voices he'd used before that.

Introducing electric guitar was on one level simply using an instrument that was new to Dylan. However, he must have realised that it would challenge (and even alienate) audiences - and break boundaries. Of course that wasn't his first 'Judas' moment: the folkies had accused him of selling out when he'd started recording songs that were neither 'folk' nor 'protest'. Later on he was accused of selling out when he became a born-again Christian - and again when he explored Judaism on the 'Infidels' album - and again when he made a Christmas album!

Great artists don't stand still and aren't afraid of making 'mistakes'. I still think that Dylan's 'Self Portrait' album is a load of rubbish - but I'd prefer him to be doing things like that than simply keep re-writing 'Blowin' In the Wind'.
 
Last edited:
Docb said:
Quite clearly off - you can take that generally as read when discussing opinions on cultural matters.

Dylan's talent for me was vested in the poetry of his lyrics. His delivery moved about for sure, but you can take the lyrics of almost any song, whatever the style it was sung in and get pleasure from their complex simplicity. The group of musicians that backed him were not bad either.

I like a bit of G&S and can remember, as a schoolboy, seeing the D'Oyly Carte production of The Mikado at Stratford. My own opinion is that they were more tapped on the shoulder. Yes, the operas have a good foundation in the score but they rely on the guality of the production to get full value. It is sad that much of their satire is lost on a modern audience as are some of the bawdier lyrics. Nanki-poo announcing he was looking for Yum-Yum would have raised a right old snigger in the pit back in the day.

I watched last night, and not for the first time, the Analogues stage production of Sgt Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band. The core group is supplemented by a string section, wind section, keyboards and percussion and present the whole album exactly as on the record. The only clue to it not being the record is the voices - they use their own rather than try and imitate the Beatles. An amazing tour de force.
Click to expand...
I agree that Dylan's lyrics are his greatest gift. However, the fact that he uses his voice to change the meaning of words or lines or even whole songs is also very special.

Dylan's never seemed particularly bothered about musical instruments: he could have carried on using The Band (all virtuoso musicians) but seemed to not want to be overshadowed by their musicianship - and he's sometimes used 'pick-up' bands who can barely follow what he's singing!

I remember being in a school production of 'Pirates of Penzance', which opened my eyes and ears to Gilbert & Sullivan. I'm a big fan of 'The Diary of a Nobody', one of whose authors was George Grossmith, who was primarily a G&S performer. His first book of reminiscences ('A Society Clown') is worth reading for any G&S fans.

In a few years we'll be re-appraising McCartney's legacy: the fact that he seems comparatively 'normal' (rather than a 'troubled genius') has meant that he's always been regarded as Lennon's sidekick. However, 'Sgt Pepper' was very much McCartney's baby - and look at how much success (in musical terms) McCartney had from 1970-80, compared with Lennon. In fact, really Lennon contributed little to The Beatles after 'The White Album': 'Let It Be' is almost a McCartney solo project and 'Abbey Road' is McCartney and Harrison and not much Lennon.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top